The Roar
The Roar

Advertisement

Why Clarke and Haddin shouldn't open for Australia

Expert
6th April, 2009
8
1063 Reads
Australian cricketer Michael Clarke celebrates his century against India. AP Photo/Aman Sharma

Australian cricketer Michael Clarke celebrates his century against India. AP Photo/Aman Sharma

Antipodean cricket watchers had a bonus on Sunday evening with a day game in Tshwanwe (Pretoria, for the old regime members) which mercifully started at 6pm on the east coast of Australia instead of a day-night match, perfect only for shift workers and web trawlers.

The Aussies to their credit had the 9 to 5 working public of Australia in mind when they crashed to 5-19 and then recovered to make a sterling 131 on the back of Callum Ferguson’s dogged half century and some minor tail end occupation.

The selectors’ opening batting theory isn’t going all that well.

Brad Haddin went early in game 2 after success in game 1. But at least he looks the part against the moving new ball, while the Test number 5, Michael Clarke, looks like a middle order player hoping that the new ball will go gun barrel straight.

Wayne Parnell didn’t bowl too many straight at all.

With quality opening bowlers the ball generally does SOMETHING! At my advanced age the memory tends to retain less and less so I searched the records from last week to check who had batted at number 1 in the Test series.

Apparently a guy called Hughes (neither Merv nor Kim, but Phil) opened and was very successful against the moving, bouncing new rock.

Advertisement

He played lots of shots, was unorthodox, fast between wickets, and can field and throw well. Sounds like the job description for the ODI team opening slot.

I looked up his domestic limited overs record – only three batsmen scored more runs in 20 over cricket and Hughes only played 4 of 7 possible matches.

His 50 over record was less impressive averaging 32 with a strike rate of 69, perhaps we have a clue to the selection panel’s reticence, but hardly condemning statistics.

So we may ask, why is Clarke, a Test middle order player with a modest African Test tour recently behind him, walking out first?

Simon Katich could even have greater credentials for opening in both forms.

With Mike Hussey really struggling (despite the 80 odd he scraped together at Wanderers in game 1) and David Hussey looking out of his depth at the top level (perhaps because of lack of self belief as he appears to play a very different game against domestic opposition than he does against the elite), the success of the first three are more important than ever.

Captain Ponting is groping for the good length ball outside off stump and managing to nick quite a few lately. He is down on his usually stellar form, which is more apt to happen when you are at the crease in the opening overs when the ball is moving furthest.

Advertisement

For Ponting to be at his most effective he needs to have more than 2 minutes settling into his dressing room chair after wishing the openers well.

Perhaps young Phillip was sent home so he could rest up for the Indian Premier League.

The rotation policy for 20 year old batsmen is a innovative one, but who really knows what Andrew Hilditch and co. will come up with next.

The selectors have got themselves caught in yet another muddled piece of thinking that has both themselves and the players wondering how their roles will be defined. A clear plan generally delivers clear thinking and then the players can go about their business.

Marcus North must also be wondering what his status in the grand scheme may be. His domestic limited overs batting was also of superior standard and he can genuinely bat in the upper order.

So the Test number five and six/seven open in 50 overs stuff, and the two new boys who were very successful in the outstanding away series win are at home sitting in their kit bags.

I look forward to the method in the madness producing consistent results.

Advertisement
close